Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. I haven't seen any proof, just assertions from the spooks <sarc> and they're super-trustworthy</sarc> The CIA says the Russians hacked the DNC and RNC and only released the DNC stuff to Wikileaks. Assange says the Ruskies aren't the source of the DNC stuff and the RNC says they weren't hacked.

I need a "who the fluff knows" option too. I have searched and searched and I simply cannot find an unbiased report about it. Kinda scary. If the CIA, FBI, POTUS, ... anyone ... wants me to believe anything like this, I'll need to see it. They're gonna need to take me through the entire "this is how we know" trail. Otherwise its just a media soundbite.

The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence. Charles BukowskiDoubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. Voltaire

What about the "false flag" possibility that John Bolton mentioned? Why would Russia leave any "fingerprints" that would lead the hack to them? Maybe a member much smarter than I can explain if it's possible to totally not leave "fingerprints."

It kinda seems that way. Regardless though, I through investigation should be done to find out what specifically was done, who was targeted, and any effect that it had. If it did happen, we should be more cautious and protected for future elections.

So the DNC announcing that their servers had been hacked before any information or emails were released was them realizing that they had a whistle blower? If so then they would know who that person was and from everything else we know about that Clinton's then that person would be dead so it doesn't hold much water. Then the same whistle blower got access to Podesta's phone?

Murray's whole argument is that why has the US not extradited the person/people responsible? If it was state sponsored then the person would be in the KGB or GRU and there for would not be extraditable.

This is classic self-limiting behavior, it is simply an excuse to cover up or draw attention from their own failure. It wasn't the Russians or the so called Fake News that cause the Democrats to lose this election. They would be better served looking into the mirror for that is where the answers are located.

Take advantage of Mr Rebates and get cash back on tons of Internet purchases. It works, it really works!!! Hit the link below and you are on your way and you will also receive a $5 bonus for signing up.

mtforpar wrote:This is classic self-limiting behavior, it is simply an excuse to cover up or draw attention from their own failure. It wasn't the Russians or the so called Fake News that cause the Democrats to lose this election. They would be better served looking into the mirror for that is where the answers are located.

I agree with this. Not that Putin didn't have his propaganda monkeys flood social media with fake stories, knowing Trump fans would gleefully spread them far and wide; he might well have. But even if true, the Democrats fumbled 2016 badly. They had the superior president-making machine, and blew it in their arrogance. They (and the media) misread the electorate and how that would play out in the Electoral College. They know it, too. I worry that they are in fact looking in the mirror and will be better prepared for 2020 than the Republicans.

Members of congress FROM BOTH SIDES who were briefed seem to agree that Russia was behind this. Both the CIA and the FBI agree on this point. What seems to be in dispute is the motive.

The CIA tends to reach conclusions more easily than the FBI. Some say this is because the FBI may be thinking along the lines of what can be proven in court. This would make sense because that is what they do, while the CIA doesn't worry about courts.

Just because someone or some country does something to influence the election toward the outcome that in fact occurred does not mean that the act was THE reason for said outcome, or even had an impact at all. Who is saying that Trump won because of this?

A report on GMA this morning stated that Russia tried to hack the GOP but were much less successful. The motive doesn't really matter here. We need to better protect against hacking, and it seems the Dems could learn a thing or two about this from their opponents.

In a news conference on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell joined the chorus of officials from both sides of the political spectrum calling for an investigation into Russia's potential impact on the U.S. presidential election. "The Russians are not our friends," he said.